On Thu, 11 Jan 2024 10:54:45 -0800 Jianfeng Wang <jianfeng.w.wang@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Unless you can show any actual runtime effect of this patch then I think > > it shouldn't be merged. > > > > Thanks for raising your concern. > I'd call it a trade-off rather than "not really correct". Look at > unmap_region() / free_pages_and_swap_cache() written by Linus. These are in > favor of this pattern, which indicates that the trade-off (i.e. draining > local CPU or draining all CPUs or no draining at all) had been made in the > same way in the past. I don't have a specific runtime effect to provide, > except that it will free 10s kB pages immediately during OOM. I don't think it's necessary to run lru_add_drain() for each vma. Once we've done it it once, it can be skipped for additional vmas. That's pretty minor because the second and successive calls will be cheap. But it becomes much more significant if we switch to lru_add_drain_all(), which sounds like what we should be doing here. Is it possible?
